Quote
straycatblues73

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
whitem8
More accurate to say it is glam, the melding of funk with rock, then add Jagger's glam outfits and makeup. Bamb! Glam rock.

Objection, Your Honour! I don't hear "Jagger's glam outfits and makeup" on 100 Years Ago. Nothing glam in it, neither in the lyrics nor in the music. I hear some different musical styles synthetically put together (rock, ballad, some funk' maybe) as well as conspicuous changes of mood, both in the lyrics and in the music. It's a nostalgic, somewhat melancholic and 'angry' ("I warn you!" ) song. No glam but real drama (paradise lost).
Romantic? Sustained!

wanna hear stones glam ? listen to parachute woman , glitter/glam with a distorted guitar following the lead melody a good five years before it became popular.

Quote
LieB


Haha! I've never thought of Parachute Woman that way, but it is kind of true! It's not too far fetched to compare the song to The Jean Genie (Bowie) or various Marc Bolan boogies, such as Get It On.

Quote
WeLoveYou
We all know that the Stones changed after Exile slightly....became less roots sounding and slightly more pop. But I've been thinking lately that this is in part because of the fashion in the early 70s for funky wah-wah and clavinet sounds (check out Jeff Beck, Stevie Wonder, Ike & Tina Turner among others). 100 Years Ago and Criss Cross/Save Me both have plenty of these. I guess it was Mick T and Billy P that pushed them in this direction then, plus Mick has often said he wanted to move away from roots music. In hindsight perhaps they should have stuck the path, the big four might then have become the big six or seven.

Quote
LieB

Quote
WeLoveYou
We all know that the Stones changed after Exile slightly....became less roots sounding and slightly more pop. But I've been thinking lately that this is in part because of the fashion in the early 70s for funky wah-wah and clavinet sounds (check out Jeff Beck, Stevie Wonder, Ike & Tina Turner among others). 100 Years Ago and Criss Cross/Save Me both have plenty of these. I guess it was Mick T and Billy P that pushed them in this direction then, plus Mick has often said he wanted to move away from roots music. In hindsight perhaps they should have stuck the path, the big four might then have become the big six or seven.

Actually, I think Mick was following trends even when the Stones were rootsy around Banquet to Exile. Country and blues was very hip in those days, post-67, when bands like The Byrds, Burrito Brothers, Buffalo Springfield, The Band, Fleetwood Mac, Led Zeppelin and all the heavier blues-based rock bands were very influential. Look at how the Beatles moved toward a heavier group-based sound on their last records. This coincided with several other things for the Stones: Keith was at his peak as a guitar player and songwriter (before smack took over too much), the Jagger-Richards songwriting relationship was at its best, Mick Taylor was newly on board along with several of their best and most bluesy session men (Hopkins, Keys, etc.), and perhaps most importantly, the Stones own blues roots fitted perfectly with those current trends.

Then, as Keith (and some of the others in the Stones camp) drifted into drug haziness, leaving more room for the melodic Taylor and the pop writer Jagger, and musical trends shifted from heavy blues towards funk, prog, glam and soft rock, the musical evolution that took place within the Stones around -73 seems very natural.

Quote
Amsterdamned
I found an interesting comment on this topic,on which I agree. Sorry if it has been posted before. :


"The no song writing credit was definitely part of the reason. Especially as he was writing more and more and was the one responsible for the Stones branching out from their usual blues-rock into more sophisticated work like Time Waits For No One, Winter, Can You Hear The Music etc. I mean did Richards ever write songs like that before or after Taylor was in the group? Hardly. Even a song like Sway which people assume is a standard Richards riff rocker - Richards had nothing to do with writing it and does not appear on any version of it. Jagger and Taylor wrote it and Jagger plays rhythm guitar. The Exiles and Goat's Head album are considered by most serious Stones fans to be primarily Jagger-Taylor albums, done while Richards was seriously incapacitated due to his heroin problem.
You also have to look at several other reasons for Mick's decision to leave the Stones.. Taylor was a young artist who wanted to improve as a player and sitting around not playing wasn't going to cut it. That was part of another reason -- he was a much better player than anybody else in the Stones - and playing three chord rock songs wasn't going to help him improve as an artist. Even while a member of the Stones he was jamming with Jack Bruce and they were talking about working together and which is what he eventually did when he quit the Stones. But Bruce basically used him for a tour to promote his own work and the idea of a real group creating new music together never happened.

Taylor hadn't been with the Stones when they 'made it' and thus never felt like a true member and never assumed he'd spend the rest of his career with the band. For those who saw the band during the tours of 72 and 73 or have heard bootleg copies of those concerts, it was obvious Taylor was playing at a level the rest of the band couldn't hope to achieve. And that had to be very boring for him. I don't think looking forward to 40 more years of playing Bitch, Brown Sugar and Midnight Rambler every time he stepped on a stage was a pleasant thought for him, From the vantage point of today, one could say he made a mistake, but I personally don't think he did. He's created some incredible music since he left the Stones while the Stones sank into a mediocrity that is truly depressing to those of us who were big fans of theirs from 64 to 74. People who see them now and rave about them have no idea what that band was capable of. The whole band should have hung it up when Wyman did. And in truth, the Stones as a band capable of making artistic statements and exciting cutting edge rock died the day Taylor left. Wood is a sorry substitute and Richards isn't close to the player he was before his heroin addiction problems. If you judge artistic success by money only, you could say he made a mistake, but it would mainly prove you don't know what is truly important to someone who has a true artists's temperament. The fact the Stones were willing to sink to what they became rather than give their best player the proper credit due to him, and haven't bothered to rectify that injustice in the 35 years since is an enormous blot on their legacy in my opinion."

Mike Cormany.

Quote
liddas

Quote
Amsterdamned
I found an interesting comment on this topic,on which I agree. Sorry if it has been posted before. :


"The no song writing credit was definitely part of the reason. Especially as he was writing more and more and was the one responsible for the Stones branching out from their usual blues-rock into more sophisticated work like Time Waits For No One, Winter, Can You Hear The Music etc. I mean did Richards ever write songs like that before or after Taylor was in the group? Hardly. Even a song like Sway which people assume is a standard Richards riff rocker - Richards had nothing to do with writing it and does not appear on any version of it. Jagger and Taylor wrote it and Jagger plays rhythm guitar. The Exiles and Goat's Head album are considered by most serious Stones fans to be primarily Jagger-Taylor albums, done while Richards was seriously incapacitated due to his heroin problem.
You also have to look at several other reasons for Mick's decision to leave the Stones.. Taylor was a young artist who wanted to improve as a player and sitting around not playing wasn't going to cut it. That was part of another reason -- he was a much better player than anybody else in the Stones - and playing three chord rock songs wasn't going to help him improve as an artist. Even while a member of the Stones he was jamming with Jack Bruce and they were talking about working together and which is what he eventually did when he quit the Stones. But Bruce basically used him for a tour to promote his own work and the idea of a real group creating new music together never happened.

Taylor hadn't been with the Stones when they 'made it' and thus never felt like a true member and never assumed he'd spend the rest of his career with the band. For those who saw the band during the tours of 72 and 73 or have heard bootleg copies of those concerts, it was obvious Taylor was playing at a level the rest of the band couldn't hope to achieve. And that had to be very boring for him. I don't think looking forward to 40 more years of playing Bitch, Brown Sugar and Midnight Rambler every time he stepped on a stage was a pleasant thought for him, From the vantage point of today, one could say he made a mistake, but I personally don't think he did. He's created some incredible music since he left the Stones while the Stones sank into a mediocrity that is truly depressing to those of us who were big fans of theirs from 64 to 74. People who see them now and rave about them have no idea what that band was capable of. The whole band should have hung it up when Wyman did. And in truth, the Stones as a band capable of making artistic statements and exciting cutting edge rock died the day Taylor left. Wood is a sorry substitute and Richards isn't close to the player he was before his heroin addiction problems. If you judge artistic success by money only, you could say he made a mistake, but it would mainly prove you don't know what is truly important to someone who has a true artists's temperament. The fact the Stones were willing to sink to what they became rather than give their best player the proper credit due to him, and haven't bothered to rectify that injustice in the 35 years since is an enormous blot on their legacy in my opinion."

Mike Cormany.

Just as a matter of curiosity, what do you find interesting in this load of BS?

C

Quote
DandelionPowderman
<"The no song writing credit was definitely part of the reason. Especially as he was writing more and more and was the one responsible for the Stones branching out from their usual blues-rock into more sophisticated work like Time Waits For No One, Winter, Can You Hear The Music etc. I mean did Richards ever write songs like that before or after Taylor was in the group? Hardly.>

Boy, people forget fast! Have anybody ever heard a song called Ruby Tuesday that Keith wrote by himself 8 years earlier? Was that song also "the usual blues-rock routine"? What about I Am Waiting, Have You Seen Your Mother, Paint It, Black etc..? Blues rock?

Imo, we should know by now that the Stones very early became masters of making a wide range of music without losing their unique sound.

As far as 100 Years Ago goes, it sounds like it's written as a simple, but effective folk music tune, but dressed in glam and funk (read modernized) - thanks to Taylor and Preston. A very easy song to write by Jagger's standards. Imo, it's a great, great song, which I've played a lot myself.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Boy, people forget fast! Have anybody ever heard a song called Ruby Tuesday that Keith wrote by himself 8 years earlier? Was that song also "the usual blues-rock routine"? What about I Am Waiting, Have You Seen Your Mother, Paint It, Black etc..? Blues rock?

Quote
neptune

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Boy, people forget fast! Have anybody ever heard a song called Ruby Tuesday that Keith wrote by himself 8 years earlier? Was that song also "the usual blues-rock routine"? What about I Am Waiting, Have You Seen Your Mother, Paint It, Black etc..? Blues rock?

Ruby Tuesday was probably co-written with Brian Jones, unless we are to believe Keith came up with that recorder melody and piano on his own. Those other songs you list were heavily influenced by Brian, but as usual the Jagger/Richards rubberstamp won the day. Let's face it, Mick and Keith received an enormous amount of help from Brian and MT from 1963 to 1974.

Quote
71Tele

Quote
DandelionPowderman
<"The no song writing credit was definitely part of the reason. Especially as he was writing more and more and was the one responsible for the Stones branching out from their usual blues-rock into more sophisticated work like Time Waits For No One, Winter, Can You Hear The Music etc. I mean did Richards ever write songs like that before or after Taylor was in the group? Hardly.>

Boy, people forget fast! Have anybody ever heard a song called Ruby Tuesday that Keith wrote by himself 8 years earlier? Was that song also "the usual blues-rock routine"? What about I Am Waiting, Have You Seen Your Mother, Paint It, Black etc..? Blues rock?

Imo, we should know by now that the Stones very early became masters of making a wide range of music without losing their unique sound.

As far as 100 Years Ago goes, it sounds like it's written as a simple, but effective folk music tune, but dressed in glam and funk (read modernized) - thanks to Taylor and Preston. A very easy song to write by Jagger's standards. Imo, it's a great, great song, which I've played a lot myself.

Very true. The Keith myth started sometime around when he started using the open G tuning, and he propagated it himself as well as it being promoted by others. For some reason he decided to break with his old pop songwriting self, which I think is a shame, though we have seen flashes of it at times in songs like "Slipping Away".

Quote
neptune

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Boy, people forget fast! Have anybody ever heard a song called Ruby Tuesday that Keith wrote by himself 8 years earlier? Was that song also "the usual blues-rock routine"? What about I Am Waiting, Have You Seen Your Mother, Paint It, Black etc..? Blues rock?

Ruby Tuesday was probably co-written with Brian Jones, unless we are to believe Keith came up with that recorder melody and piano on his own. Those other songs you list were heavily influenced by Brian, but as usual the Jagger/Richards rubberstamp won the day. Let's face it, Mick and Keith received an enormous amount of help from Brian and MT from 1963 to 1974.

Quote
Amsterdamned
Let's face it, Mick and Keith received an enormous amount of help from Brian and MT from 1963 to 1974.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Where are your sources from, when you state that these songs are heavily influenced by Brian?

Btw, the recorder never plays the melody on Ruby Tuesday. You think Keith's own story when he claims he wrote the song on piano is false?

Quote
Koen
Of course, they were part of the band. Just as they got help from Ronnie after he joined. There is a difference between writing and arranging a song.

Quote
neptune

Quote
Koen
Of course, they were part of the band. Just as they got help from Ronnie after he joined. There is a difference between writing and arranging a song.

Well, we know Keith had nothing to do with Sway and 100 Years Ago, but he's given songwriting credit for those. How do you explain that?

Quote
neptune

Quote
Koen
Of course, they were part of the band. Just as they got help from Ronnie after he joined. There is a difference between writing and arranging a song.

Well, we know Keith had nothing to do with Sway and 100 Years Ago, but he's given songwriting credit for those. How do you explain that?

Quote
neptune

Quote
Koen
Of course, they were part of the band. Just as they got help from Ronnie after he joined. There is a difference between writing and arranging a song.

Well, we know Keith had nothing to do with Sway and 100 Years Ago, but he's given songwriting credit for those. How do you explain that?

Quote
liddas
If a thread reaches 4 pages of posts, no matter how distant the initial subject may have been, there is good chance that the discussion turned into a "Brian Jones / Mick Taylor were ripped off their writing credits" debate rather than a "Mick Taylor is god / Ron Wood shit" one.

Incredible.

C

Quote
LieB

Quote
liddas
If a thread reaches 4 pages of posts, no matter how distant the initial subject may have been, there is good chance that the discussion turned into a "Brian Jones / Mick Taylor were ripped off their writing credits" debate rather than a "Mick Taylor is god / Ron Wood shit" one.

Incredible.

C

Yes ... this thread was very interesting for a while, but turned into the usual endless banter ... and I have nothing to add right now.

Quote
neptune

Quote
Koen
Of course, they were part of the band. Just as they got help from Ronnie after he joined. There is a difference between writing and arranging a song.

Well, we know Keith had nothing to do with Sway and 100 Years Ago, but he's given songwriting credit for those. How do you explain that?